Over to You, Fred Cole
The King Prawn ·
February 8, 2013 at 4:44pm
Two women delivering newspapers were shot by police who confused their blue Toyota Tacoma for that of the suspected (crazy) cop killer.
I lean libertarian, and things like this help firm up my conviction that a civilian is a civilian whether they are police or not. If we've reached a point where we require a militarized police force, the civil society is dead. Let us compose our laments and dirges -- then arm up. Hobbes rules here now.
- Comment (232)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (27)
Comments:
Nov '11
Re: Over to You, Fred Cole
PracticalMary:
That is the main problem but I think it might be easier to solve on a local basis and even has a chance on the Federal level as people are hearing about swat teams descending on businesses, farms and individuals.
I hate to keep coming back to this all the time, but the thing that changed police and policing and how the police function and how they interact with the public is the War on Drugs.
It created new revenue both federal grants and local asset seizures, it created criminals out of non-criminals, its been a boon to organized crime, its decimated civil society in local neighborhoods, it gives the police the justification for new powers and new weapons, it gives every city a SWAT team, it created all these changes for the worse.
It created bigger government and perverse incentive structures and we all pay the price for these things, some people with their lives.
Dec '10
Re: Over to You, Fred Cole
John Grant: Hi King Prawn,
I have one quibble with your piece. Shooting innocent civilians is not Hobbesian. The whole points of Hobbes' argument is for a regime that secures the lives of its citizens.
We use Hobbes as a metaphor for unlimited government. But Hobbes' Leviathan is in many ways much more limited than our regime today. · 3 minutes ago
I was referring to his state of nature rather than to his social contract. If the only thing that can keep our society in check and keep the "citizens" safe is the strong arm (holding forbidden arms) of the state, then we're built on a Hobbesian state of nature that only a Hobbesian Leviathan can subdue. If, however, we have a Lockean nature, then such a highly armed and motivated law enforcement institution is unwarranted.
Mar '12
Re: Over to You, Fred Cole
We unfortunately have a need for police forces which are capable of protecting us from heavily armed and often well trained individuals who are not concerned about our well-being.
Those men and women have a job which often puts them in front of people whose contempt for the ordinary person is the reason why the police are necessary, but which cannot but affect how the police see and judge a lot of what occurs.
I am sorry about the women who were shot. They certainly did not deserve that fate, but would they be worse off if they had met the former cop, or the guy who shot up the theater, or the individual who rampaged through the grade school, or people who drive airplanes into buildings?
The police who shot those women were looking for someone who is busy shooting policemen. They rightly were concerned for their own lives, and the welfare of their families should they die.
I have no desire to be a policeman but I have some real empathy for the position they live with daily.
Dec '10
Re: Over to You, Fred Cole
Fred Cole
I hate to keep coming back to this all the time, but the thing that changed police and policing and how the police function and how they interact with the public is the War on Drugs.
It created new revenue both federal grants and local asset seizures, it created criminals out of non-criminals, its been a boon to organized crime, its decimated civil society in local neighborhoods, it gives the police the justification for new powers and new weapons, it gives every city a SWAT team, it created all these changes for the worse.
It created bigger government and perverse incentive structures and we all pay the price for these things, some people with their lives. · 2 minutes ago
What if the "war on drugs" (regardless of the negative side effects) was necessary for civil society to remain whole? What if this is the lesser of two evils? There's a thought to help you get your drunk on this weekend.
Apr '11
Re: Over to You, Fred Cole
I hate to be insensitive, here but really I don't think we have a problem with the cops gunning people down needlessly. This was a terrible tragedy no doubt but it is an anomaly.
Dec '10
Re: Over to You, Fred Cole
From the story, "A second shooting, involving Torrance police officers, occurred about 5:45 a.m. at Flagler Lane and Beryl Street in Torrance. No injuries were reported in that incident."
Oct '10
Re: Over to You, Fred Cole
Hay, I don't think they need military equipment. Pistols, rifles and shotguns will do, I'm sure.
Re: Over to You, Fred Cole
Tough indeed. More on the Main Feed later.
Feb '12
Re: Over to You, Fred Cole
Fred Cole
[The War on Drugs] created new revenue both federal grants and local asset seizures, it created criminals out of non-criminals, its been a boon to organized crime, its decimated civil society in local neighborhoods, it gives the police the justification for new powers and new weapons, it gives every city a SWAT team, it created all these changes for the worse.
It created bigger government and perverse incentive structures and we all pay the price for these things, some people with their lives. · 13 minutes ago
I think Fred has the major term here. The perverse incentives in the war on drugs corrupts our police forces.
Police have an incentive to allow the war on drugs to continue ad infinitum. Without the scraps our police forces find from the illegal drug operation's table scraps, and increased funding for drug enforcement our police state wouldn't survive on traditional sources of revenue.
Either we should wage an actual war on drugs, which I don't think our public has the political will to execute, or admit defeat and come up with an alternate mechanism to mitigate narcotics' effects on society.
Jan '13
Re: Over to You, Fred Cole
Donald Todd:
I am sorry about the women who were shot. They certainly did not deserve that fate, but would they be worse off if they had met the former cop, or the guy who shot up the theater, or the individual who rampaged through the grade school, or people who drive airplanes into buildings?
The police who shot those women were looking for someone who is busy shooting policemen. They rightly were concerned for their own lives, and the welfare of their families should they die.
I have no desire to be a policeman but I have some real empathy for the position they live with daily. · 21 minutes ago
So you're justiftying this by saying we need to accept a modest level of idiocy by the police? Sorry, but they don't get to be trigger happy just because somebody wants them dead. If a concealed carry permit holding private citizen shot two paper ladies because he/she wrongly perceived them to be a threat, the CCW holder would be arrested and charged and Diane Feinstein would make it part of her next diatribe against guns.
Nov '11
Re: Over to You, Fred Cole
That's true to a point.
Things like the North Hollywood Shootout are pretty rare.
Also, I'd dispute that criminals are "often well trained."
Edited on February 8, 2013 at 6:05pmMar '11
Re: Over to You, Fred Cole
Fred Cole
That's true to a point.
Things like the North Hollywood Shootout are pretty rare. · 1 minute ago
But it is so often the rare and extreme events which are used to justify the most odious, intrusive, and frankly stupid lawmaking.
It's that whole "If it saves even one life" [CoC expletive].
We should disqualify anyone in public service who has not read Bastiat.
Nov '11
Re: Over to You, Fred Cole
The King Prawn
What if the "war on drugs" (regardless of the negative side effects) was necessary for civil society to remain whole?
That always seems to be the claim. But then again, you can get a statist to justify whatever action they want for society to remain whole.
When it comes to the War on Drugs, it's always the claim, never seem to see a justification for it.
Nov '11
Re: Over to You, Fred Cole
skipsul
We should disqualify anyone in public service who has not read Bastiat.
Well said! I'm still laughing from that.
The only thing I'd add to it is "and that shall be the whole of the law."
So, put it together and
Oct '10
Re: Over to You, Fred Cole
In none of the situations you cite were the police in the least bit effective. When you need a cop in seconds, he is only 13 minutes away, and will show up with a clipboard.
Fred Cole... It (the war on drugs) created new revenue both federal grants and local asset seizures, it created criminals out of non-criminals, its been a boon to organized crime, its decimated civil society in local neighborhoods, it gives the police the justification for new powers and new weapons, it gives every city a SWAT team, it created all these changes for the worse.
It created bigger government and perverse incentive structures and we all pay the price for these things, some people with their lives. · 31 minutes ago
Until now, we did not agree with Fred. What we are facing now is worse than the drug war itself.
Nov '11
Re: Over to You, Fred Cole
raycon and lindacon
Fred Cole... It (the war on drugs) created new revenue both federal grants and local asset seizures, it created criminals out of non-criminals, its been a boon to organized crime, its decimated civil society in local neighborhoods, it gives the police the justification for new powers and new weapons, it gives every city a SWAT team, it created all these changes for the worse.
It created bigger government and perverse incentive structures and we all pay the price for these things, some people with their lives. · 31 minutes ago
Until now, we did not agree with Fred. What we are facing now is worse than the drug war itself. · 2 minutes ago
w00t! as the kids say.
Now I assign you reading. Go read the 12 Feb 1996 issue of National Review.
Dec '10
Re: Over to You, Fred Cole
Fred Cole
The King Prawn
What if the "war on drugs" (regardless of the negative side effects) was necessary for civil society to remain whole?
That always seems to be the claim. But then again, you can get a statist to justify whatever action they want for society to remain whole.
When it comes to the War on Drugs, it's always the claim, never seem to see a justification for it. · 8 minutes ago
I was being purely speculative. I think the "war" on drugs is suspect, but I know the abuse of drugs is not. Of course, if we still had a civil society with a healthy shame aspect to it then drugs would probably not be a problem that rises to the level that justifies a militarized police state.
Dec '10
Re: Over to You, Fred Cole
Also, Fred, I don't think the war on drugs justifies militarization of the police. Law enforcement and military are entirely separate matters to be handled very differently. Military = kill your enemy into submission as a first response. Law enforcement should never approach any situation with a kill first mentality, not even this one. Yes, the guy is specifically targetting (and maybe even hunting) LEOs. That does not justify shooting dozens of rounds (look closely at the picture) into the back of a vehicle with unidentified persons inside it. Even in the military the use of deadly force is more tempered than this was.
May '11
Re: Over to You, Fred Cole
I agree that the "war on drugs" and its accompanying militarization of polices forces is related to the events in California. It does not speak well for our society.
To add a little more gloom, let's not overlook the fact that most police forces serve as revenue agents for the city, county, municipality, etc . . .
My brother rode along with a State Trooper a few years back and the Trooper confided that he had a ticket quota to meet. Which was actually fairly easy to meet because in the Trooper's words, "every car on the road is violating some law or regulation."
When the police look at us as either (i) drug felons, or (ii) sheep to be fleeced, we have a long road ahead of us to normalcy.
Oct '12
Re: Over to You, Fred Cole
This killer is targeting cops and their families. He has even given names of of those he would like to kill. He has killed at least one cop plus a daughter of another. These cops were guarding the house of one of the named individuals in the early morning when a pickup looking like the one they were to watch for came slowly by with the lights out. I'm sure they feared for their own lives as well as those they were there to protect. A difficult situation, as it turns out an unfortunate decision was made. It was unfortunate for all involved.But how does this relate to the war on drugs?